After a month of continuous protests against President Nicolás Maduro's government, his announcement on May 1, 2017 calling for a “popular constitutional assembly” that would replace the country's current Constitution — approved in 1999 as the foundation stone of Hugo Chávez's mandate — was not well received by diverse sectors of Venezuelan society.

Moisés González, who considers himself a Chavista, wrote for the online news site Aporrea, affirming that the call opens two roads: the elimination of the so-called “Bolivarian Constitution”, or the search of “formulas that violate the democratic principles that kept the Revolution legitimate”. González pointed out that:

Both options put the continuity of the democratic process started by Chávez in 1999 against the wall. But options limit the possibility for the left to reorganize and purge its members for a true recovery of the Bolivarian Revolution. Both options put the country on a silver platter for reactionary politics. Both options could have been avoided with the publication of an election timetable and the acceptance of elections, and all the other democratic possibilities that the best Constitution in the continent offers.

On the other hand, researcher Eduardo Febres backed the government's decision on his Twitter account:

Taking into account all these, we can then evaluate the risk of this proposal: the illegitimate designation of a ‘national popular constitutional assembly’, in violation of the direct, secret and universal voting rights, that would allow disruption of all the Public Powers, now, on an even superior level.

The measure has been qualified as arbitrary; a radical answer to the pressure that looms over Maduro after the almost daily protests that have hit the country since March 30, 2017, when the National Assembly was dissolved, and a sort of “forward runaway” that pretends to change the game rules to allow him to stay in power for longer.

If it is indeed called, the Constitutional Assembly puts a hold to all kinds of elections, and places under its orders the rest of the constitutional powers.

In my view, the Maduro's intention behind this move, undeniably unconstitutional, is to simulate he's following the democratic mechanisms and a supposed ‘respect’ to popular sovereignty so, in the first place, he can win time, and in second place, he can have a close and controlled tool that would be above all constitutional powers (Attorney's Office, National Assembly, among others) so he can govern without the discomfort and obstacles that our State model imposes on him.

According to Maduro's own words from Monday, the formation process of the Assembly would imply the election of at least 500 representatives, half of which would be chosen by sector representation; that is, by social categories that presumably will derive from organizations like community councils, which are not provided for in the Constitution, and are the result of social and political control from the government. Journalist and activist Jeanfreddy Gutiérrez wrote:

So the disguise of electing 200 or 250 constitutionalists of the 500 proposed by Nikolav [Nicolás] for the ‘popular, working and community’ Constitutional Assembly is looking to save himself from the necessary referendum needed (to ask the people whether or not they want this process at all) and don a mask of ‘popular democracy’ to a second degree election that violates the universality and eligibility of the vote: which is that anyone can vote or be elected.

On Tuesday May 2, 2017, the professors of Constitutional Law of Venezuela's Central University pronounced themselves against the initiative, underlining that the vote should be universal, free, direct and secret; and that even if the president has the right to propose a constitutional initiative, he cannot call to a direct election without a previous referendum.

The next day, in a closed-door session, President Maduro read and signed Decree 2.830, which pretends to “activate” the call for a process named “Citizen Constitutional National Assembly”. As expected, the decree confirms that the members of said assembly will be elected:

[…] an election system by ‘sectors’, allowing each sector defined by the government (the working class, for example), to designate, within its inner circle, the representatives to the constitutional assembly. At least, as it was said on May 1, for half the electoral members, which guarantees the government control over this fraudulent constitutional national assembly.

Support our work

Global Voices stands out as one of the earliest and strongest examples of how media committed to building community and defending human rights can positively influence how people experience events happening beyond their own communities and national borders.

2 comments

Jon Koepur

I lived (as contractor for PDSVA) in Venezuela from 1995 until the PDVSA riots in 2002. I got to travel several places in their country. Then, they did not care of their country. Too much crime and trash everywhere, which I got witness . To me, you ought change the title “Is this end of the ‘FIFTH’ Republic of Venezuela”.